2018Annals of SurgeryRequires access

Shadows Behind Using Simple Risk Models in Selection of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients for Liver Transplantation

Michał Grąt, Jan Stypułkowski, Marcin Morawski, Karolina Maria Wronka, Michał P. Wasilewicz, Zbigniew Lewandowski, Karolina Grąt, Zofia Wójcik, Waldemar Patkowski, Krzysztof Zieniewicz

Open publisher page 19 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the potential influence of replacing Milan criteria with simple risk scores on outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients undergoing liver transplantation. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Several risk scores combining morphological and biological features were recently proposed for precise selection of HCC patients for transplantation. METHODS: This retrospective study included 282 HCC liver transplant recipients. Recurrence-free survival (RFS), the primary outcome measure, was evaluated according to Metroticket 2.0 model and French AFP model with Milan criteria serving as benchmark. RESULTS: Patients were well stratified with respect to RFS by Milan criteria, Metroticket 2.0 criteria, and AFP model cut-off ≤2 points (all P < 0.001) with c-statistics of 0.680, 0.695, and 0.681, respectively. Neither Metroticket 2.0 criteria (0.014, Z = 0.023; P = 0.509) nor AFP model (-0.014, Z = -0.021; P = 0.492) provided significant net reclassification improvement. Both patients within the Metroticket 2.0 criteria and AFP model ≤2 points exhibited heterogeneous recurrence risk, dependent upon alpha-fetoprotein (P = 0.026) and tumor number (P = 0.024), respectively. RFS of patients beyond Milan but within Metroticket 2.0 criteria (75.3%) or with AFP model ≤2 points (74.1%) was inferior to that observed for patients within Milan criteria (87.1%; P = 0.067 and P = 0.045, respectively). Corresponding microvascular invasion rates were 37.2% and 50.0%, compared with 13.6% in patients within Milan criteria (both P < 0.001). Moreover, Milan-out status was associated with significantly higher recurrence risk in subgroups within Metroticket 2.0 criteria (P = 0.021) or AFP model ≤2 points (P = 0.014). CONCLUSION: Utilization of simple risk scores for liver transplant eligibility assessment leads to selection of patients at higher risk of posttransplant HCC recurrence.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVE: To assess the potential influence of replacing Milan criteria with simple risk scores on outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients undergoing liver transplantation. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Several risk scores combining morphological and biological features were recently proposed for precise selection of HCC patients for transplantation. METHODS: This retrospective study included 282 HCC liver transplant recipients. Recurrence-free survival (RFS), the primary outcome measure, was evaluated according to Metroticket 2.0 model and French AFP model with Milan criteria serving as benchmark. RESULTS: Patients were well stratified with respect to RFS by Milan criteria, Metroticket 2.0 criteria, and AFP model cut-off ≤2 points (all P < 0.001) with c-statistics of 0.680, 0.695, and 0.681, respectively. Neither Metroticket 2.0 criteria (0.014, Z = 0.023; P = 0.509) nor AFP model (-0.014, Z = -0.021; P = 0.492) provided significant net reclassification improvement. Both patients within the Metroticket 2.0 criteria and AFP model ≤2 points exhibited heterogeneous recurrence risk, dependent upon alpha-fetoprotein (P = 0.026) and tumor number (P = 0.024), respectively. RFS of patients beyond Milan but within Metroticket 2.0 criteria (75.3%) or with AFP model ≤2 points (74.1%) was inferior to that observed for patients within Milan criteria (87.1%; P = 0.067 and P = 0.045, respectively). Corresponding microvascular invasion rates were 37.2% and 50.0%, compared with 13.6% in patients within Milan criteria (both P < 0.001). Moreover, Milan-out status was associated with significantly higher recurrence risk in subgroups within Metroticket 2.0 criteria (P = 0.021) or AFP model ≤2 points (P = 0.014). CONCLUSION: Utilization of simple risk scores for liver transplant eligibility assessment leads to selection of patients at higher risk of posttransplant HCC recurrence.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 19 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the potential influence of replacing Milan criteria with simple risk scores on outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients undergoing liver transplantation. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Several risk scores combining morphological and biological features were recently proposed for precise selection of HCC patients for transplantation. METHODS: This retrospective study included 282 HCC liver transplant recipients. Recurrence-free survival (RFS), the primary outcome measure, was evaluated according to Metroticket 2.0 model and French AFP model with Milan criteria serving as benchmark. RESULTS: Patients were well stratified with respect to RFS by Milan criteria, Metroticket 2.0 criteria, and AFP model cut-off ≤2 points (all P < 0.001) with c-statistics of 0.680, 0.695, and 0.681, respectively. Neither Metroticket 2.0 criteria (0.014, Z = 0.023; P = 0.509) nor AFP model (-0.014, Z = -0.021; P = 0.492) provided significant net reclassification improvement. Both patients within the Metroticket 2.0 criteria and AFP model ≤2 points exhibited heterogeneous recurrence risk, dependent upon alpha-fetoprotein (P = 0.026) and tumor number (P = 0.024), respectively. RFS of patients beyond Milan but within Metroticket 2.0 criteria (75.3%) or with AFP model ≤2 points (74.1%) was inferior to that observed for patients within Milan criteria (87.1%; P = 0.067 and P = 0.045, respectively). Corresponding microvascular invasion rates were 37.2% and 50.0%, compared with 13.6% in patients within Milan criteria (both P < 0.001). Moreover, Milan-out status was associated with significantly higher recurrence risk in subgroups within Metroticket 2.0 criteria (P = 0.021) or AFP model ≤2 points (P = 0.014). CONCLUSION: Utilization of simple risk scores for liver transplant eligibility assessment leads to selection of patients at higher risk of posttransplant HCC recurrence.

Key concepts: Milan criteria, Medicine, Liver transplantation, Hepatocellular carcinoma, Internal medicine, Transplantation, Gastroenterology, Retrospective cohort study

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Shadows Behind Using Simple Risk Models in Selection of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients for Liver Transplantation — Research Paper | ScholarLens